Editors, politicians and rights activists voiced grave concern over the attack on the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star, describing it as a planned and deadly assault on democracy, media freedom and human life.
They said the violence was not sudden but carefully orchestrated with the clear intent to intimidate and kill journalists. The vandalism, they warned, marked a shift from debates over freedom of expression to a basic question of survival and personal safety.
Speaking a protest meeting, organised jointly by Editors’ Council and Newspaper Owners Association at a hotel in the city on Monday, they stressed that disagreement in a democratic society can never justify arson, mob attacks or death threats.
They linked the violence to the gradual rise of mob rule, institutionalised over time through political patronage and state inaction, leaving authorities unable or unwilling to intervene even as attacks continued for hours.
The failure to respond effectively raised serious questions about governance, national security and state responsibility, they pointed, warning that allowing such violence would undermine elections, distort politics and endanger fundamental rights.
Nurul Kabir
English daily New Age Editor Nurul Kabir described the attack on the offices of Prothom Alo and The Daily Star as an attempt to burn people alive in a medieval age manner. He said the very nature of the attack proves it was neither a momentary reaction nor an isolated incident, but a planned and deadly act.
“Everywhere in the world, media outlets have their own editorial policies. If someone does not like a policy, setting fire to a media house is not a democratic process,” said Kabir, also the president of Editors’ Council.
He said that disagreement is an inherent part of democracy, but violence can never be its language, warning that if society fails to stand up against such attacks, the damage will not remain confined to the media alone. For this, the entire social system will collapse and all paths to progress will be blocked.
In this context, Kabir stressed the urgent need for unity among journalists, writers, and intellectuals, calling it the most necessary response at this moment.
Mahfuz Anam
Painting a grave picture, The Daily Star Editor Mahfuz Anam said, in the current context, the issue [mob vandalism] moved far beyond freedom of expression, rather it became a question of life and safety. “Freedom of expression is far away. Now it is about the right to stay alive,” he said.
Referring to a video circulating on social media, he noted that there was a direct threat to kill journalists of The Daily Star and Prothom Alo by going house to house. He said the incident was neither accidental nor sudden, calling the attackers “murderers.”
Describing the severity of the attack, Anam said during the arson, around 25 to 26 colleagues were trapped on the roof of the building, while the fire service was prevented from entering. “This means they did not just want to burn the building. They wanted to kill them,” he said, adding that symbolic reactions or declarations of unity alone are not enough, there must be a strong and effective response.
Iftekharuzzaman
Placing the attack within a broader state and social context, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) Executive Director Iftekharuzzaman said mob rule or “mobocracy,” did not emerge overnight, it has developed over time within the state structure itself, beginning from the very center of power, the Secretariat.
From there, he said, practices such as land grabbing and the use of muscle power gradually became institutionalised. He said those controlling the state later relied on mob forces as pillars of their authority, leaving the state unable to stop violence happening in front of its own eyes.
While acknowledging that confronting the situation is a collective responsibility, Iftekharuzzaman stressed that the primary responsibility lies with the government. He described the current situation as a question of national security and warned that media freedom and fundamental rights are now under direct attack.
He also questioned the effectiveness of the national security system, pointing to the lack of coordination, strategic resistance, and clear communication from the authorities. Criticising the interim government, he asked whether it was actually governing or merely consumed by internal conflicts.
Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir
BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir said the recent incidents were not attacks on specific media outlets but direct attacks on democracy itself. “Today it is not The Daily Star. It is not Prothom Alo. Today democracy has been attacked,” he said.
According to him, this is an attempt to once again shrink people’s right to think freely, restrict freedom of speech, and undermine the spirit of the July struggle, which sought to establish the rights of the people.
Nahid Islam
“A section in the government is involved with that is happening now,” National Citizen Party (NCP) Convener Nahid Islam alleged, referring to mob violence.
He said the incident [attack on two media houses] was carried out using the name of martyr Sharif Osman Hadi and the slogans of July, putting a special responsibility on those who led the July mass uprising.
He explained that while the immediate post-uprising period was marked by anger, a state vacuum, and the absence of police, what is happening now is entirely different.
Saying that the current violence is well planned, he alleged political backing, social approval, and involvement from within the state structure–these three factors worked together in this incident. “Without these, no one could have shown such audacity.”
He claimed that the attack was intended to divert the country’s politics, elections, and state direction.
Barrister Sara Hossain
Raising serious questions about state responsibility, human rights activist Barrister Sara Hossain asked why no government representative went to the scene of attacks when others, including Nurul Kabir, were able to do so.
She reminded that this is an interim government and the responsibility for direct intervention in crises is even greater. “Despite repeated phone calls during the incident there was no effective response from the authorities,” she said, alleging there were only vague assurances, while in reality, no effective action was visible, even the fire was burning for hours.
As a result, she said, fundamental questions have arisen about the state’s duty to protect citizens’ lives, rights, and livelihoods.
Restoring peace is the responsibility of the state, Hossain said and concluded by calling for accountability not only from those directly responsible but also from human rights activists within the government, asking whose rights they are seeking to protect?
